Arizona & N. M. Ry. Co. v. Clark

The complaint in this action, which is for damages for personal injuries alleged to have been received by the plaintiff below, defendant in error here, through the alleged negligence of the defendant to the action, was twice amended; the sufficiency of that upon which the case was tried being questioned by two demurrers, one general, and the other special, and by two motions, in support of each of which are cited in the brief here filed for the plaintiff in error a large number, of authorities. It is readily conceded that the complaint might well have been more concise, logical, and clear; but we are of the opinion that its manifest defects are not fatal.

In addition to the jurisdictional facts, it alleges, in effect, that at the times in question the defendant to the action was the owner of and engaged in operating a railroad from Clifton, Ariz., to Hachita, N. M. (then territories, but since become states), carrying both passengers and freight for hire over its road between the points mentioned; that at Clifton it owned and maintained as a part of its road a large number of tracks, turnouts, and switches, for the storage of cars, and for the making up of trains, which tracks…